Monday, February 27, 2012

Israel’s possible strike on Iran will only strengthen the Mullah regime….

US, Israel and their allies are
arm-twisting and pressurizing Iran into submission over its nuclear program.
The rest of the world, including the so-called Ummah, is either watching Iran’s persistent defiance of global
pressure helplessly or with wide-eyes, except those nations of the region who
foresee devastating consequences of any misadventure in Iran. Iran feels that
its nuclear program is directly threatened by the USA, Israel and conservative
Arab nations for various reasons.

The
United States and its traditional allies (Britain, France, Germany, etc.) are
increasingly worried about a nuclear Iran, especially given the tense
relationship Iran has with most Western nations since the Iranian Revolution of
the late 1970s. Israel has a long history of conflict with the Muslim world,
and the current president of Iran has made several anti-Semitic comments, and
has indicated that he does not believe Israel should exist. Israelis are
worried that Iran's President is seeking to acquire nuclear weapons in order to
destroy Israel and kill millions of Jews.

Conservative Arab nations, such as
Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf States are equally wary of Iran’s
nuclear. Having a total lack of ability to target Iran’s nuclear installations
themselves, these Arab nations may very well aid and abet any attack by the
West and/or Israel. Historically Persian Iran has been in conflict with the
Arab nations. This is partly due to the fact that Iran is dominated by the
Shiite sect of Islam, while most Arab nations are controlled by the majority
Sunni sect of Islam.

Although, there is still no
hard proof that Iran’s nuclear program is designed to produce nuclear arms, the
US and its allies would like to forestall any future eventuality leading Iran
to becoming a nuclear state. Still, Israel’s right-wing Likud Party may
actually intend to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, just as Israel attacked
Iraqi and Syrian nuclear facilities to preserve its Mideast nuclear monopoly.
Whipping up a crisis over Iran also serves to deflect attention from the
unresolved question of Palestine and from Israel’s growing social and economic
problems.

Having assessed the cost, and
possibly learned from Iraq fiasco, the US & Co is exercising maximum
restraint in going to a war on the issue. The war, if it happens, will have the
potential for a wide-spread conflict engulfing in the war-flames the farther
shores. Apart from destabilization, destruction and devastation for the region,
will any attack by Israel or the US have any devastating consequences for the
attackers themselves?

Accordingto a recent analysis carried byThe National Interest, Israel has some three hundred
nuclear devices in its arsenal, capable of being delivered by medium-range
ballistic missiles, submarine-launched cruise missiles and aircraft with
standoff missiles. Two of Israel’s three German-supplied “Dolphin-class” submarines carrying
nuclear-armed missiles are reportedly stationed off Iran’s coast, providing an
invulnerable second-strike capability for the Jewish state. Any Iranian nuclear
attack on Israel would result in Iran being vaporized. Israel’s potential
target list in Iran is clear. At least twelve major nuclear or nuclear-related
sites would have to be struck to seriously damage Iran’s nuclear program, some
of which is buried deep underground. Leading targets include the aboveground heavy-water/reactor
facility at Arak; reactors at Bushehr (a civilian power reactor relying on
Russian-supplied fuel), the new underground enrichment facility near Qum at
Fordow, the ore conversion plants near Isfahan, and other facilities at Qazvin,
Damghan, Tabriz, Lavizan, Chalus, Darkhovin and Parchin.

Iran itself and the adjoining
states may become a direct target of nuclear fallout because destroying Iran’s
many reactors and processing facilities could release large amounts of
radiation and create radioactive dust storms. Winds would carry this toxic
miasma over Afghanistan and its large U.S. military garrison. Dangerous
radiation would also extend to Pakistan, western India, Iraq, Kuwait and to the
Gulf, where large numbers of U.S. military personnel are based. Equally
ominous, radioactive dust could blanket oil fields in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and
the UAE. High-altitude winds would spread radioactivity around the globe, as
occurred at Chernobyl in the Ukraine, but at a factor of twenty times or more.

Air attacks may not be as
effective as a nuclear attack. The
Pentagon has estimated it will need to strike at least 3,200 targets in Iran,
including nuclear facilities, air and naval bases, military production plants,
headquarters, communications hubs, missile bases, Gulf ports, and
command-and-control facilities. After the first wave, air and missile strikes
as well as Special Forces raids would have to continue for weeks, perhaps
months. However, the most important result of an Israeli air campaign against Iran
would be to draw the United States into a long-running conflict with the
Islamic Republic that it neither wants nor can afford. After having lost two
expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is quite inconceivable that the US
would decide to go to a third major conflict which could possibly wreck
America’s finances and plunge the republic in an Orwellian state of permanent
war.

It may be kept in view that the national interests of Israel
and the United States do not converge, and many leading figures of the US
administration blindly believe the Israeli claims that Iran poses a deadly
threat to its existence, and act as if the Israeli nuclear arsenal is of no
concern.

Paul Rogers in his report, Military Action
Against Iran: Impact and Effects,warns that consequences of Iran conflict would be
devastating and would lead to a long war. The study follows Israeli
reports that Syria is manufacturing Iranian M-600 missiles for Hezbollah, the
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu calling Iran “the ultimate terrorist threat”
and saying it was a mistake to think Iran’s nuclear ambitions could be
contained, and a call from the United Arab Emirates Ambassador in Washington
for a military strike on Iran.

The report outlines the likely shape of an Israeli
strike, saying it would be focused not only on destroying ‘military real
estate’ – nuclear and missile targets - but also would hit factories and
research centers, and even university laboratories, in order to do as much
damage as possible to the Iranian expertise that underpins the program. The
strike would not be limited to remote bases but would involve the direct
bombing of targets in Tehran. It would probably include attempts to kill those
technocrats who manage Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. It would be widely
viewed across the Middle East as having been undertaken with the knowledge,
approval and assistance of the United States, even if carried out solely by
Israel.

Professor Rogers says that, “There would be many
civilian casualties, both directly among people working on Iran’s nuclear and
missile programs, but also their families as their living quarters were hit,
and secretaries, cleaners, laborers and other staff in factories, research
stations and university departments.”While much damage would be done to Iran’s
nuclear and missile programs, it would increase Iranian political unity, making
the Ahmadinejad regime more stable.

Iran would be able to respond in many ways, argues
the report, including withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT) and immediate action to develop nuclear weapons to deter
further attacks. Such work would use deeply-buried facilities that are reported
to be under construction. A series of actions aimed at Israel as well as
targeting the United States and its western partners including missile attacks
on Israel. These actions, including paramilitary and/or missile attacks on
western Gulf oil production, processing and transportation facilities would
cause a sharp rise in oil prices by closing the Straits of Hormuz.

The experts and analysts agree that an Israeli
attack on Iranian nuclear facilities would almost certainly be the beginning of
a long-term process of regular Israeli air strikes to further prevent the
development of nuclear weapons and medium-range missiles. Iranian responses
would also be long-term, ushering in a lengthy war with global as well as
regional implications. The report concludes that “the consequences of a
military attack on Iran are so serious that they should not be encouraged in
any shape or form. However difficult, other ways must be found to resolve the
Iranian nuclear crisis.”

6 comments:

So Iran should be allowed to have nuclear weapons? as the leading destabalizing government in the world today ?. Its amusing when anaylsts deduce a moral equivelancy between Isreal having nukes and Iran having them. All they need to do is read ?

I think the question is, should Israel be allowed to illegally have nukes under the non proliferation act without inspection nor comment by US top politicians including the president then destroy its neighbors nukes while committing genocide in Palestine as noted in the Goldstone Report? First, Israel owns the US through its AIPAC arm of billionaires that have bought the government, own Hollywood, major newspapers, and hold top positions in the FBI, CIA, the white house, congress, facebook, dell, the pentagon, and are accused of being involved in 9/11. A simple google search would provide a plethora of connections. In summary, PM Sharon reportedly stated in 2001 that they “control the U.S.” which makes sense since Israel is funded, given free military equipment, and makes our elected officials travel there for long “talks.” If that isn’t enough then Obama and the French president may be correct that the PM of Israel is a “Liar” but Obama must speak to him daily, yes, that’s daily and coming out of your presidents mouth on a recording not meant for the citizens ears.

The right to self determination is a right of all nations-regardless if you believe in their 'system' or not. Why is Israel allowed to have that right but not Iran? Don't get me wrong- Iran isn't an innocent actor on the world stage, but is the US really threatened? Why do our politicians and leaders act as if we should be afraid of Iran? Other countries mainly N.Korea, Pakistan, India and SOuth Africa all have or posess the ability to make and deliver nuclear weapons. Why don't we attack them also? If Israel attacks Iran- Iran has the right as a global nation- to defend itself. Why should the US help Israel? Iran didn't bomb our cities, threaten our commerce or citizens, attack our troops or bases. THe US should be de-escalating this not escalating the potential for war.

Woah! I'm really enjoying the template/theme of this site. It's simple, yet effective. A lot of times it's challenging to get that "perfect balance" between usability and visual appearance. I must say that you've done a amazing job with this. In addition, the blog loads extremely fast for me on Safari. Excellent Blog!My page > Make Money Easy